American Tract Society & the American Sunday School Union Agree ~

[SabbathBlessings]

If one does not want to follow the scripture Hebrews 10, Colossians 2:14 its probably better to error on the side of keeping both than to do away with one of the commandments of God, but God does give us free will to see how things turn out despite His endless warnings in scripture. John 14:15, Revelation 14:12, Revelation 22:14-15, Matthew 7:21-23 1 John 2:3-6 Hebrews 10:26-30, James 2:10-12. There is clear scripture why we don’t sacrifice animals, as it points to Jesus and His sacrifice for sin and sanctification, which has nothing to do with one of the Ten Commandments, that reveals sin Romans 7:7 and God alone wrote with His own finger Exodus 31:18 and part of God’s law in heaven, Revelation 11:19 Isaiah 66:22-23


Happy Thanksgiving all!

God bless.

 

[The Liturgist]

Jesus kept the Sabbath, so we should. Jesus kept the rest of the feasts, so we should.

Which everyone does, aside from certain Jewish specific feasts which are irrelevant for Christians, like Purim and Tabernacles (why have a Festival of Tabernacles to listen to the Law that according to St. Paul we are not subject to?)

 

[The Liturgist]

If one does not want to follow the scripture Hebrews 10, Colossians 2:14 its probably better to error on the side of keeping both than to do away with one of the commandments of God, but God does give us free will to see how things turn out despite His endless warnings in scripture. John 14:15, Revelation 14:12, Revelation 22:14-15, Matthew 7:21-23 1 John 2:3-6 Hebrews 10:26-30, James 2:10-12. There is clear scripture why we don’t sacrifice animals, as it points to Jesus and His sacrifice for sin and sanctification, which has nothing to do with one of the Ten Commandments, that reveals sin Romans 7:7 and God alone wrote with His own finger Exodus 31:18 and part of God’s law in heaven, Revelation 11:19 Isaiah 66:22-23


Happy Thanksgiving all!

God bless.

It seems like you are implying that failure to follow the parts of the Torah that you consider relevant would preclude salvation. I thought Adventists believed in Sola Fide?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

It seems like you are implying that failure to follow the parts of the Torah that you consider relevant would preclude salvation. I thought Adventists believed in Sola Fide?

This was meant to answer the question do we abolish all laws or keep all laws (instead of following scripture on the laws). In my opinion its best to follow scripture, but if one is going to have the mentality to either follow all laws or no laws, I would error on the side of keeping, than not keeping.

We are not saved by law-keeping. Keeping the law just to be saved is not saving. Jesus wants our hearts transformed by His love. When you love Jesus you want to do what He asks because of love. Keeping God’s commandments through love is an outward expression that your heart has been transformed. You do not keep the commandments to be saved but because one is saved. Revelation 14:12

 

[Leaf473]

This was meant to answer the question do we abolish all laws or keep all laws (instead of following scripture on the laws).

Hi SB, which question or post are you referring to?

 

[FredVB]

What Jesus said applies. Jews may say commandments are just for them, and primarily that is right, in the sense that all other people would perish. Because they are not doing what is of the will of God anyway. If they are not to perish, they would need to become proselytes, to turn Jewish. Then it was, as you mention, gentiles should at least be Noachide, to not perish. But Jesus was not talking about that. Jesus mentioned he had sheep of another fold, and he had grace to provide a miracle to a Syro-Phoenician woman. It was his prior knowledge of what would be revealed to the apostles later that the gospel of salvation would be made available to gentiles without circumcision and them becoming Jewish. The minimum was for them to observe what was determined at the Council in Jerusalem and sent out to the churches with gentile believers. And there was recognition, in the context of that, that all the believers with those who were gentile among them would gather at the Jewish synagogues on Sabbath, to learn from teaching of scriptures. And this is with Jesus having said, Sabbath is made for man. So all the commandments show what is of God's will, and there isn't an exception to them for being dismissed.

By the way, in the rules it is not right to accuse another of claiming salvation is involved with or determining salvation. None of us are talking about that. There is the will of God considered, and believers should care to not sin, so the will of God is relevant. Salvation is available from God's grace, while it is available to sinners, who should turn from sin.

And if you care to observe what was said for gentile believers in that council, which I also believe to do, you would stop having blood in anything. Because meat has blood in it and cooking meat is not removing blood but only cooking it dry, you would stop having meat. God's perfect will for us was shown with the beginning, things permitted are not what corresponds to God's perfect will for us. Proverbs 12:10

That’s actually untrue. Meat can be koshered so as to remove the blood, but mainly this is to discourage, for example, black pudding and also eating something that is still alive, or slaughtering animals by strangulation.

This is a personal interpretation, that those at the council could not apply. God said from the very time that animals were given into our hand (the way Job was given into the hand of Satan), blood was not to be had, and blood would have to all be removed. This was not just for Israel, it was for all who use meat from animals, and the apostolic council recognized it and continued it, though apostles and James there did not still eat what was taken from animals. Jews did what they knew how to do for removing blood, which you don't do, cooking blood in meat is not removing blood, but Jews were not succeeding, as there is still blood left in any meat. They just were doing what you don't even do at all, so according to what you said you have what you don't have permission to have from God, truly disregarding what would be God's perfect will.

 

[The Liturgist]

This is a personal interpretation, that those at the council could not apply. God said from the very time that animals were given into our hand (the way Job was given into the hand of Satan), blood was not to be had, and blood would have to all be removed. This was not just for Israel, it was for all who use meat from animals, and the apostolic council recognized it and continued it, though apostles and James there did not still eat what was taken from animals. Jews did what they knew how to do for removing blood, which you don't do, cooking blood in meat is not removing blood, but Jews were not succeeding, as there is still blood left in any meat. They just were doing what you don't even do at all, so according to what you said you have what you don't have permission to have from God, truly disregarding what would be God's perfect will.

No, what I provided was how the Christian Church as a whole historically interpreted Acts 15 without dissent for at least 1700 years, which is why in most denominations the consumption of meat is permitted and in many, actively encouraged (for example, Paschal Lamb on the Feast of the Resurrection).

 

[FredVB]

No, what I provided was how the Christian Church as a whole historically interpreted Acts 15 without dissent for at least 1700 years, which is why in most denominations the consumption of meat is permitted and in many, actively encouraged (for example, Paschal Lamb on the Feast of the Resurrection).

It is not a reliable argument to appeal to things done in the churches through history, that is not the same as discussing things from scripture passages. I can see myself churches did things that were wrong through history. And not removing blood from meat to start with if it will be had is not a part of any permission from God.

 

[Leaf473]

It is not a reliable argument to appeal to things done in the churches through history, that is not the same as discussing things from scripture passages. I can see myself churches did things that were wrong through history. And not removing blood from meat to start with if it will be had is not a part of any permission from God.

Okay, so now I'm curious

And not removing blood from meat to start with if it will be had is not a part of any permission from God.

What is the scriptural way to remove blood from an animal?

Peace be with you

 

[FredVB]

It is not a reliable argument to appeal to things done in the churches through history, that is not the same as discussing things from scripture passages. I can see myself churches did things that were wrong through history. And not removing blood from meat to start with if it will be had is not a part of any permission from God.

Okay, so now I'm curious

What is the scriptural way to remove blood from an animal?

Peace be with you

God knows, people are so thoroughly addicted to things they have and are in denial of that, that they dismiss any of the things that come up about it. I would avoid being rude about it as far as possible, but I do have to say, it isn't my problem. There are abundant good reasons not to have meat from animals, and I don't for many years, and while many have their conscience silenced, beyond a certain very young age, and won't even consider to check conditions animals are in from which they get meat which are actually awful, including among Christians as much as anyone, when they choose church or Bible passages for what they have found for basis to show them instead, there are plenty of passages that are overlooked showing using animals for our food is not God's perfect will for us, and despite what passages they know to argue it is otherwise, it is not at all as healthy as having no animal products and having just whole food, with some vitamins, avoiding processed stuff for food, to avoid what comes to harm our health with those, including cancers, and issues from clogged arteries like heart attacks and strokes, and high blood pressure, and type 2 diabetes, and rheumatoid arthritis, and any of a number of other issues to health or wellbeing, which I really do see a lot among Christians as they grow older.

www.forksoverknives.com

It doesn't have to be dismissed, if scripture passages I can mentioned are desired, including to show God does care for animals and has plans for them, which does not involve them being just food. Yet if this will be dismissed, having meat with blood removed as far as Jews manage it with kosher meat, that is available, would need to be chosen. But it is known with enough information now, even that meat, or any we can get, still has some blood of the animal in it, just having more if it is not kosher. I don't have that issue since giving up meat long ago. Even James and a number of apostles are known for not continuing to have meat or other things taken from animals.

 

[Leaf473]

God knows, people are so thoroughly addicted to things they have and are in denial of that, that they dismiss any of the things that come up about it. I would avoid being rude about it as far as possible, but I do have to say, it isn't my problem. There are abundant good reasons not to have meat from animals, and I don't for many years, and while many have their conscience silenced, beyond a certain very young age, and won't even consider to check conditions animals are in from which they get meat which are actually awful, including among Christians as much as anyone, when they choose church or Bible passages for what they have found for basis to show them instead, there are plenty of passages that are overlooked showing using animals for our food is not God's perfect will for us, and despite what passages they know to argue it is otherwise, it is not at all as healthy as having no animal products and having just whole food, with some vitamins, avoiding processed stuff for food, to avoid what comes to harm our health with those, including cancers, and issues from clogged arteries like heart attacks and strokes, and high blood pressure, and type 2 diabetes, and rheumatoid arthritis, and any of a number of other issues to health or wellbeing, which I really do see a lot among Christians as they grow older.

www.forksoverknives.com

It doesn't have to be dismissed, if scripture passages I can mentioned are desired, including to show God does care for animals and has plans for them, which does not involve them being just food. Yet if this will be dismissed, having meat with blood removed as far as Jews manage it with kosher meat, that is available, would need to be chosen. But it is known with enough information now, even that meat, or any we can get, still has some blood of the animal in it, just having more if it is not kosher. I don't have that issue since giving up meat long ago. Even James and a number of apostles are known for not continuing to have meat or other things taken from animals.

Well, first off, if someone doesn't want to eat meat for health reasons, that's fine. And yes, overall, vegetarians are healthier.

I notice two things in the scriptures:
There are commandments about not eating blood.
And there are instructions about people eating animals, such as Exodus 12.
You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at evening. 7 They shall take some of the blood, and put it on the two door posts and on the lintel, on the houses in which they shall eat it. 8 They shall eat the meat in that night, roasted with fire, with unleavened bread. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. 9 Don’t eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts.

So I wondered what the scriptural method of eating meat without blood was. I couldn't think of any scriptures, myself.

Peace be with you

 

[FredVB]

Well, first off, if someone doesn't want to eat meat for health reasons, that's fine. And yes, overall, vegetarians are healthier.

I notice two things in the scriptures:
There are commandments about not eating blood.
And there are instructions about people eating animals, such as Exodus 12.
You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at evening. 7 They shall take some of the blood, and put it on the two door posts and on the lintel, on the houses in which they shall eat it. 8 They shall eat the meat in that night, roasted with fire, with unleavened bread. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. 9 Don’t eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts.

So I wondered what the scriptural method of eating meat without blood was. I couldn't think of any scriptures, myself.

Peace be with you

That really is not the only reason though it is significant, there are really many very good reasons. I can really discuss these to any who will be willing to hear.

Christ is the one sacrificed who the Passover lamb foreshadowed. It was blood that was shed that was significan rather than eating meat. When he came, he was the Passover Lamb at Passover. So with Christ we don't need to have an observance eating meat.

 

[Leaf473]

That really is not the only reason though it is significant, there are really many very good reasons. I can really discuss these to any who will be willing to hear.

Christ is the one sacrificed who the Passover lamb foreshadowed. It was blood that was shed that was significan rather than eating meat. When he came, he was the Passover Lamb at Passover. So with Christ we don't need to have an observance eating meat.

Well, that's interesting to know!

For the Israelites who lived before the cross, though... How were they told to remove the blood from the meat? What do the scriptures say on the subject, if anything?

Peace be with you

 

[FredVB]

Well, that's interesting to know!

For the Israelites who lived before the cross, though... How were they told to remove the blood from the meat? What do the scriptures say on the subject, if anything?

Peace be with you

If we take what we read in scriptures seriously, we would not have anything with blood, because of the scripture passages showing that God said that. Almost no one takes it that seriously, but they do show that. I care for the perfect will of God for us, it is shown, and I don't get meat from animals, and never others' blood. What others show of anything permitted is not about God's perfect will for us. Jews from old testament conditions had professional butchers use knowledge of old testament times to remove all the blood they knew about from the flesh of the butchered animals, for kosher meat. That is the only way you would get meat with blood removed, according to that. It disregards that we are to have no blood, as knowledge to us in this day shows us some blood always remains with meat, even kosher meat from which all blood known of from those ways is removed. But God's perfect will for us does not include our having meat from animals, so there isn't a problem with this. Not simply my opinion, there is abundance of information available that having it is not better for us, it is actually worse for us, though unfortunately products from animals are very addictive, and people are very much creatures of habit, though I found it is not fully overriding choices we can make; and, use of animal agriculture is much worse for our world, with destructiveness contrary to God's will, and it uses much more of resources and land and water; and, God cares for the creatures from God's creation and use of animals is by its nature having a lot of abuse to animals in horrible conditions, which is injustice to them and contrary to what God has shown for us, while with animal agriculture which is growing there is loss of wildlife and there is a huge rate of extinction of animals in this world.

 

[Leaf473]

If we take what we read in scriptures seriously, we would not have anything with blood, because of the scripture passages showing that God said that. Almost no one takes it that seriously, but they do show that. I care for the perfect will of God for us, it is shown, and I don't get meat from animals, and never others' blood. What others show of anything permitted is not about God's perfect will for us. Jews from old testament conditions had professional butchers use knowledge of old testament times to remove all the blood they knew about from the flesh of the butchered animals, for kosher meat. That is the only way you would get meat with blood removed, according to that. It disregards that we are to have no blood, as knowledge to us in this day shows us some blood always remains with meat, even kosher meat from which all blood known of from those ways is removed. But God's perfect will for us does not include our having meat from animals, so there isn't a problem with this. Not simply my opinion, there is abundance of information available that having it is not better for us, it is actually worse for us, though unfortunately products from animals are very addictive, and people are very much creatures of habit, though I found it is not fully overriding choices we can make; and, use of animal agriculture is much worse for our world, with destructiveness contrary to God's will, and it uses much more of resources and land and water; and, God cares for the creatures from God's creation and use of animals is by its nature having a lot of abuse to animals in horrible conditions, which is injustice to them and contrary to what God has shown for us, while with animal agriculture which is growing there is loss of wildlife and there is a huge rate of extinction of animals in this world.

Yes, I can see the possibility that if we take what we read in scriptures seriously, we would not have anything with blood.

However, my question was about the Israelites before the cross. There are passages where they are commanded to eat meat. I used Passover as an example earlier, this would be another:

The waved breast and the heaved thigh you shall eat in a clean place, you, and your sons, and your daughters with you: for they are given as your portion, and your sons’ portion, out of the sacrifices of the peace offerings of the children of Israel.
Leviticus 10

This looks to me like the instruction for removing blood from an animal,
Whatever man there is of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners among them, who takes in hunting any animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood, and cover it with dust. 14 For as to the life of all flesh, its blood is with its life. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, “You shall not eat the blood of any kind of flesh; for the life of all flesh is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Leviticus 17

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[FredVB]

Yes, I can see the possibility that if we take what we read in scriptures seriously, we would not have anything with blood.

However, my question was about the Israelites before the cross. There are passages where they are commanded to eat meat. I used Passover as an example earlier, this would be another:

The waved breast and the heaved thigh you shall eat in a clean place, you, and your sons, and your daughters with you: for they are given as your portion, and your sons’ portion, out of the sacrifices of the peace offerings of the children of Israel.
Leviticus 10

This looks to me like the instruction for removing blood from an animal,
Whatever man there is of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners among them, who takes in hunting any animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood, and cover it with dust. 14 For as to the life of all flesh, its blood is with its life. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, “You shall not eat the blood of any kind of flesh; for the life of all flesh is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Leviticus 17

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The focus from God was not on eating meat from animals. People of Israel and other people generally were already doing that, at some times anyway. When people of Israel lusted for meat when God already was giving them manna from heaven, and God provided for that and they were eating it ungratefully God let many among them perish. About priests, even before Moses, priests were in the front of the line for access to meat from animals. Sacrifices of animals had started, long before, and priests performing sacrifices with burning the flesh to whatever they observed as god for what they thought would be demanded were first to start having cooked meat from it. It is evident that there was sacrifice of human prisoners too in those archaic times. People were all thinking to make sacrifices and it was the excuse for the people of Israel to be leaving from Egypt. God really put great parameters on sacrificing, without the torture there was, with a more speedy slaughter, and with all blood that they could remove being removed then first. And that was just for appointed priests of Israel and no one else. There was no requirement on people generally to eat meat, and eating meat was not the focus from God, when we needed to know about atonement, that there is only from Christ. It could not be focus from God on eating meat in light of Genesis 1:29.

 

[FredVB]

Yes, I can see the possibility that if we take what we read in scriptures seriously, we would not have anything with blood.

However, my question was about the Israelites before the cross. There are passages where they are commanded to eat meat. I used Passover as an example earlier

Exceptions to those eating meat were permitted, none of the meat left the next day was to be had. The focus of Passover is not about having meat, nothing in the Bible elevates eating or drinking over things of the kingdom and the fruits of the Spirit, Passover is about being delivered with having been covered, with the memorial that precious blood was shed for them. Of course this is a type for Christ. There should be no focus taking away from that, such as some do to support eating meat. It just isn't God's higher will for us.

Not having any blood with meat being had was not just to those of Israel. Where it seems that God wanted meat from animals permitted to everyone, which is what others often claim from it, God is shown to say, "But flesh with its life, that is, its blood, you shall not eat. I will surely require accounting for your life’s blood. At the hand of every animal I will require it. At the hand of man, even at the hand of every man’s brother, I will require the life of man." Genesis 9:4-5

If it is meant to be permitted to all who who descend from Noah through his sons, it would just be with the same requirements, so that is not just for those of Israel. But why would God mean to do that? God did not say anything to change for what people were meant to have for over 1600 years from after the beginning which was according to the design from God's perfect will, which includes Genesis 1:29. Things were not perfect according to God's will then, many centuries later, after all that time, when as was shown there were people that had been living much longer than people since then. Think of what had changed for those circumstances.

 

[Leaf473]

The focus from God was not on eating meat from animals. People of Israel and other people generally were already doing that, at some times anyway. When people of Israel lusted for meat when God already was giving them manna from heaven, and God provided for that and they were eating it ungratefully God let many among them perish. About priests, even before Moses, priests were in the front of the line for access to meat from animals. Sacrifices of animals had started, long before, and priests performing sacrifices with burning the flesh to whatever they observed as god for what they thought would be demanded were first to start having cooked meat from it. It is evident that there was sacrifice of human prisoners too in those archaic times. People were all thinking to make sacrifices and it was the excuse for the people of Israel to be leaving from Egypt. God really put great parameters on sacrificing, without the torture there was, with a more speedy slaughter, and with all blood that they could remove being removed then first. And that was just for appointed priests of Israel and no one else. There was no requirement on people generally to eat meat, and eating meat was not the focus from God, when we needed to know about atonement, that there is only from Christ. It could not be focus from God on eating meat in light of Genesis 1:29.

Exceptions to those eating meat were permitted, none of the meat left the next day was to be had. The focus of Passover is not about having meat, nothing in the Bible elevates eating or drinking over things of the kingdom and the fruits of the Spirit, Passover is about being delivered with having been covered, with the memorial that precious blood was shed for them. Of course this is a type for Christ. There should be no focus taking away from that, such as some do to support eating meat. It just isn't God's higher will for us.

Not having any blood with meat being had was not just to those of Israel. Where it seems that God wanted meat from animals permitted to everyone, which is what others often claim from it, God is shown to say, "But flesh with its life, that is, its blood, you shall not eat. I will surely require accounting for your life’s blood. At the hand of every animal I will require it. At the hand of man, even at the hand of every man’s brother, I will require the life of man." Genesis 9:4-5

If it is meant to be permitted to all who who descend from Noah through his sons, it would just be with the same requirements, so that is not just for those of Israel. But why would God mean to do that? God did not say anything to change for what people were meant to have for over 1600 years from after the beginning which was according to the design from God's perfect will, which includes Genesis 1:29. Things were not perfect according to God's will then, many centuries later, after all that time, when as was shown there were people that had been living much longer than people since then. Think of what had changed for those circumstances.

Fred, my man, these are the things to deal with, if you wish:

God said not to eat blood.

God commanded the eating of meat.

So either there's a reasonable way to remove blood from meat, or God is commanding people to sin. Seems like draining the blood and then cooking the meat would cause enough of a transformation to the residue of blood that was left that it would no longer be considered meat with blood in it.

That seems like a reasonable approach to me, but if you want to take a different approach or interpretation, that's fine.

Peace be with you

 

[FredVB]

Exceptions to those eating meat were permitted, none of the meat left the next day was to be had. The focus of Passover is not about having meat, nothing in the Bible elevates eating or drinking over things of the kingdom and the fruits of the Spirit, Passover is about being delivered with having been covered, with the memorial that precious blood was shed for them. Of course this is a type for Christ. There should be no focus taking away from that, such as some do to support eating meat. It just isn't God's higher will for us.

Not having any blood with meat being had was not just to those of Israel. Where it seems that God wanted meat from animals permitted to everyone, which is what others often claim from it, God is shown to say, "But flesh with its life, that is, its blood, you shall not eat. I will surely require accounting for your life’s blood. At the hand of every animal I will require it. At the hand of man, even at the hand of every man’s brother, I will require the life of man." Genesis 9:4-5

If it is meant to be permitted to all who who descend from Noah through his sons, it would just be with the same requirements, so that is not just for those of Israel. But why would God mean to do that? God did not say anything to change for what people were meant to have for over 1600 years from after the beginning which was according to the design from God's perfect will, which includes Genesis 1:29. Things were not perfect according to God's will then, many centuries later, after all that time, when as was shown there were people that had been living much longer than people since then. Think of what had changed for those circumstances.

Fred, my man, these are the things to deal with, if you wish:

God said not to eat blood.

God commanded the eating of meat.

So either there's a reasonable way to remove blood from meat, or God is commanding people to sin. Seems like draining the blood and then cooking the meat would cause enough of a transformation to the residue of blood that was left that it would no longer be considered meat with blood in it.

That seems like a reasonable approach to me, but if you want to take a different approach or interpretation, that's fine.

Peace be with you

There were exceptions permitted so it was not God's command for all to eat meat, but any meat left was to be burned up. It is this overlooking still of what Passover is meaning, it is not God's intent to serve your appetites, it is about deliverance with sacrifice, and it is Christ's sacrifice that is needed, and those delivered need to be under the blood. It is a great mistake to make Passover an argument for having meat, it isn't about that.

What was permitted was not in a perfect arrangement and was not to be ongoing. Blood was to all be removed, and for that time it was thought all blood was removed with the appropriate means. Now we can know better.

It is still neglected that there is the epidemic of heart attacks and strokes from clogged arteries, and high blood pressure, and cancers, and diabetes, and many other health issues, and these are connected with use of animal products, there is real abuse to animals that are bred and slaughters in the billions every year, environments are being ruined and there is ongoing extinction of many species, while more land, water, and resources are being used, with animal agriculture. And still, God's fine with animals being slaughtered and us using what we have from that when there are healthier ways? Genesis 1:29 provided what was the best for us. And God cares for the creatures from God's creation, as shown in many passages, and we are to be responsible and are not excused from checking, Proverbs 12:10.

 

[Leaf473]

There were exceptions permitted so it was not God's command for all to eat meat, but any meat left was to be burned up. It is this overlooking still of what Passover is meaning, it is not God's intent to serve your appetites, it is about deliverance with sacrifice, and it is Christ's sacrifice that is needed, and those delivered need to be under the blood. It is a great mistake to make Passover an argument for having meat, it isn't about that.

What was permitted was not in a perfect arrangement and was not to be ongoing. Blood was to all be removed, and for that time it was thought all blood was removed with the appropriate means. Now we can know better.

It is still neglected that there is the epidemic of heart attacks and strokes from clogged arteries, and high blood pressure, and cancers, and diabetes, and many other health issues, and these are connected with use of animal products, there is real abuse to animals that are bred and slaughters in the billions every year, environments are being ruined and there is ongoing extinction of many species, while more land, water, and resources are being used, with animal agriculture. And still, God's fine with animals being slaughtered and us using what we have from that when there are healthier ways? Genesis 1:29 provided what was the best for us. And God cares for the creatures from God's creation, as shown in many passages, and we are to be responsible and are not excused from checking, Proverbs 12:10.

Deuteronomy 18
They shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire and his portion.

This shall be the priests’ due from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep, that they shall give to the priest: the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the inner parts.

If you don't want to eat meat, that's fine. If you say that God never told people to eat meat, then we disagree.

I don't know much about Hebrew, but that verb "shall eat" above appears to be in the same form as "shall have" in Exodus 20.

Deuteronomy 18:1 Interlinear: 'There is not to the priests the Levites -- all the tribe of Levi -- a portion and inheritance with Israel; fire-offerings of Jehovah, even His inheritance, they eat,

Exodus 20:3 Interlinear: 'Thou hast no other Gods before Me.

Peace be with you, my man!